Dennis Ross is Not the Change We Can Believe In

If the latest events and the negative role of US diplomacy has shown anything it is that we can't have the same US policies in regards to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The news leaks that former Clinton advisor Dennis Ross might be getting the nod to be involved in the new administration as an advisor to the Middle East is certainly not the change that President elect Barack Obama promised during his election campaign.

The prevailing impression in the region and especially among Arabs is that, Dennis Ross was nothing more than a postman for the Israelis. On more than one occasion Arab negotiators have complained that Ross in his job as an American envoy was given them a carbon copy of documents or proposals that the Israelis had sent to their Arab interlocutor.

Perhaps Ross's biggest problems happened after he left the White House as he led the, now disproven myth about what actually happened during the Barack-Arafat-Clinton Camp David talks in the last days of the Clinton administration. At that time Ross led the chorus of Israeli apologists placing all the blame for the failure of the talks on the Palestinian leader. Ironically, Ross, himself, was the person who convinced Arafat to go to Camp David after solemnly promising him that neither side will be publicly blamed if the talks fail. Palestinian president Arafat had told Ross that the time was not ripe for a summit but Ross, in connivance with Barack, attempted to railroad a bad deal down Arafat's throat. Arafat who felt that the deal was very bad for Palestinians asked his US hosts if they can get the support of Arab leaders, they were unable to.

Dennis Ross's lexicon is one reflection of his bias. In a speech he gave to the Seeds for Peace organization, last April, Ross refused to use the universally accepted word "occupation" in describing Israeli army's presence in the Palestinian territories. Instead he used the word "Israeli control."

After he left his job as senior Mideast negotiator continued to work and speak mostly on behalf on behalf of pro Israel Jewish organizations. If the US wants an honest broker, they can certainly find many other much more neutral and respected individuals to Arabs and Israelis including well qualified and politically honest and neutral American Jewish academics and diplomats.

America is poised on a new course when the champion of change, Barack Obama takes office on January 20th. Those who totally believe in a nonviolent solution to the Arab Israeli conflict and wish for true and lasting peace, wish on America's new president to apply his change mantra to the position of his special advisor to the Middle East.

Comments

[louisben]

Thank you Mr. Kuttab. Based on his statements Mr. Ross seems keen on attempting the railroading approach again with Iran - and this could be disastrous for the US and the region.
As you say, he represents anything but change.

We need to put the best people forward to address issues in the Middle East. We have plenty of them and Ross is not among them.
The US's best assets are its people and the diversity they bring. As Roger Cohen says in the Times online today the Obama Mid East advisers' team should include Arab and Iranian Americans. This is what makes us great and helps us get the best for the US and the world.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/opinion/12cohen.html?ref=opinion

[rasit]

And I would like to see Mr. Daoud Kuttab, and others with influence to seek change from those groups who resort to violence, instead of seeking the path of negotiations to peace. Also not to use religion to solve political problems...

As it is more of a problem in the Arab region, it would be very helpful, if the moderate Arab countries would use their influence on countries like Iran and Syria, to rein in the groups who seek resolution to their problems through violence, rather than through negotiations...Western countries can only do so much.....

[StanDaMan]

I agree that the violence is ugly and senseless. It only serves to fuel hatred and give succor to extremists on both sides. But, it has to be put in context because, without context, one cannot understand its cause. The violence arises because of actions taken by Israel in blatant disregard of international law which dispossessed, repressed, killed and injured Palestinians [see, e.g., UN resolutions GA#194 (1948) re the right of return of the 700,000+ Palestinians expelled on Israel's creation, SC#242 (1967) re Israel's occupation is illegal, and SC#446 (1979) re Israel's settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal]. Most reasonable people, if asked, would say that the violence would stop if Israel merely complied with its international law obligations.

[edwcorey]

Israel has the right to defend itself. As much right as the burglar who enters your house and makes himself at home does.

[naijaman]

Dennis Ross is not the President, Barack Obama is. Stop hyperventilating and allow Obama to get into office and DO something before piling on him. HE sets the policy, not Ross. And let me remind folks, Obama has a degree in Internation Relations, and was very prophetic in his assessment regarding the problems we would face if we invaded Iraq. Calm down folks....yeesh.

[StanDaMan]

Dennis Ross is symbolic of the problem in American politics as it relates to Middle East policy. He would be appointed to "broker" an "honest" solution in the Middle East, but, as a Likudite, his real goal is to further Israel's de facto annexation of the Occupied Territories. Ross's appointment would be akin to putting a fox in charge of chickencoop security and expecting something good to result.

The main problem with American politics is the massive amounts of money allowed in the electoral system. It fuels massive corruption and results in undue control and influence over key aspects of American political policy. For example, the oil and energy companies dictate energy policy, the NRA and gun manufacturers dictate gun "control" policy, the insurance and drug companies dictate health policy, the military-industrial complex dictates military spending and foreign policy, etc., etc.. And AIPAC and their the pro-Likud ilk (including Dennis Ross) dictate America's Middle East policy.

[jollyelle]

They say Clinton was the country's "first black president" and many Chicago Jews feel that once the history books are written Obama will be known as the nations "first Jewish president".

[rasit]

I think you are jumping into conclusion, without any proof; at least wait till PE Obama takes office....He will be the President of ALL the people, as he has said...

[edwcorey]

If you look at his appointments, seems he will be president of the right-leaning ones who don't want the activities of the past eight years investigated.

[zookie]

This is just one of Obama's picks for mideast "envoys"........Ross is particularly disturbing because of his ultra-Zionist views...exact carbon copy of the neocons who got us in the Iraq fiasco of today. Then Obama picks Richard Haass, another neocon, and Richard Holbrooke, another Israeli sympathizer, to handle the second and third tier of Mid-East negotiations. This is incredulous. Obama has failed to live up to his campaign promises of an "even-handed approach" to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, he has guaranteed the failures of any such negotiations by fully supporting Israeli-Zionist views and ideology. As Cheney had his neocons, Obama has picked his. And then there is Hillary, whose top adviser is Martin Indyk...all Israeli fronts.
Obama, it turns out, is another politician in the pockets of Israel. What a sad commentary on the USA.

[Lon]

The appointment of Ross is worrisome because he has not had difficulty hiding his slants, at least since the failure at Taba. He may well have had some balance before that, but he seems to have felt a need to blame someone else for that failure and simplemindedly placed all of the blame on Arafat.

On reading a description of his of the failures it was striking that he pointed to places where Arafat did not keep to the letter of the previous agreements as proving that Arafat was not interested in peace. He pointed to places where Barak did not keep to the letter of previous agreements as proving that Barak was so interested in peace that he was doing what was necessary to get Israelis to trust the peace process. There was no indication that he saw the contradictory standards by which he was judging the two.

[munimula]

Dennis Ross, after 12 years of trying, was a complete failure in his Middle East negotiations. I am sure that Obama will continue the U.S. policies that have brought nothing but death and destruction to Israel and Palestine. The little dance Obama did before AIPAC this past summer was a clear indication of this. The only one that did the dance better than him was Hillary Clinton!

Maybe there will be more "talk" under an Obama administration, but there has been plenty of that over the past 40 years, but since the US cannot bring itself to be even-handed, nothing will change.

Here is a proposal from Uri Avnery, in the form of a memo to Obama, that would have a chance a breaking this decades long stalemate:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/avnery?rel=rightsideaccordian

[randyjet]

I like most of what Avney says. The one point that is a BIG problem is his treatment of Hamas. They have NO interest or desire for any kind of peace with Israel,nor does Iran. That problem has to be eliminated by force. Until that is done, there can be no peace at all.

As in all such conflicts, there will ALWAYS be a fanatic minority which will oppose any deal. That was true in Ireland when it took a civil war to bring peace. It will take the same thing in Palestine. Either the PA kills off Hamas, or the IDF does. That is why I am all in favor of this latest conflict in Gaza and I hope that Israel does a good job in killing off as many Hamas as they can to weaken them, so that if t deal is reached and they fight it, the PA will be able to win that conflict and finish them off once and for all.

[munimula]

I don't think you can "kill off" Hamas. It's easy to paint them as just a terrorist organization, but in fact, they are also, like it or not, a genuine national and religious movement supported by most of the people in Gaza. They cannot be simply bombed away.

And if Obama follows Avnery's prescription, and The Saudi proposal brings normalized relations with 22 Arab states, and a feasible Palestinian state, what exactly would remain of the big threat to Israel from Iran?

If Israel, with US help, has the courage to go the Avnery route, once these disputes are settled and Israel has internationally recognized borders, I would go as far as to say that Israel could join NATO, thereby adding another layer of security.

I believe you are correct that there will always be crazies and terrorists on all side. There have been for 6000 years, and there will be for the next 6000 years. Eradicating them won't happen. Marginalizing them can happen, and in relatively short order.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/avnery?rel=rightsideaccordian

[rasit]

I read Uri Avnery's proposal and it sounds very reasonable, but I think getting the Israelis to agree to some of its terms (1967 line, removing settlers etc) would be far more difficult than getting the Palestineans to agree on this proposal...

[Nickesq]

Dennis Ross is a tool of AIPAC, no more no less. In 20 years of trying to get peace he has not one success to his name. He needs to be discarded.

[marignymitch]

I think what Obama meant to says is: This is the change in Clinton administration you can believe in.

[bookriver]

If Obama resigns a retread like Ross, an AIPAC apparatchik whose portfolio is to insure failure of a Palestinian-israeli peace process, this is indeed a dismal , disheartening and dangerous appointment. He is clearly signalling to the world that an Obama presidency will not be much different than the Bush II policy when it comes to the region. Despite lofty campaign rhetoric and, more recently, fake news from Fox about innovative approaches to the region, these are false moves and straw men meant to increase pressure on Obama to maintain the murderous status quo, not alter it. Unfortunately, he caved on the endgame before the match even began in earnest. The appointment of Ross is capitulation to those forces who dragged us into Iraq, want to drag us into a confrontation with Iran and wants to continue the Israeli terror against the Palestinians. What Ross and his ilk fail to remember is "what does not kill you, makes you stronger. Bombing Gaza to get Hamas is like bombing Chicago to get rid of Cub fans. Its stupid and senseless. Negogiate but not with Ross. He is a gofer for the Israelis and nothing more. This is a low rent appointment.

[jollyelle]

Well said.

[alexa07]

My family is becoming increasingly more unhappy with Obama. If Dennis Ross is once again involved in negotiations, this is a clear signal to all parties--more of the same charades, predictably resolving nothing & leading to yet more disasters in the region. We have had more than 60 yrs. of ugly messes, more recently in Iraq & now in Gaza because of our failed policies.

[BillZBubb]

Dennis Ross "postman for Israel"--EXACTLY correct. Guys like Ross make the situation worse, not better.